Season’s Greetings to all you blog surfers and many thanks for taking the time over the festive period to peruse this humble little review source. That darned review congestion has hit me so hard that I’m deliberately avoiding watching new films such as Happy Feet 2 and Puss in Boots so they don’t get in the way of my still-in-progress Skyward Sword review which is on the way, I promise. Reviews for those three animated films I keep mentioning will now likely appear some time in the new year. One film I wasn’t going to wait to watch was this sequel to Guy Ritchie’s 2009 adaptation of the stories of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s famous sleuth starring Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law.

The runaway success of the first film inevitably birthed a franchise that, for once, makes perfect sense, after all Sherlock Holmes was a franchise character that starred in numerous novels and short stories and gave rise to a great number of other adaptations down the years. The untraditional depiction of the character, visual style, focus on action and director’s trademark flourishes caused many of the more militant purists to cry foul but Sherlock Holmes was perfectly in keeping with the escapist spirit of the original writings and lays down the character vividly and more faithfully than many realise. RDJ’s Holmes is as flawed, difficult and erratic as Doyle’s, maintaining the character’s mastery of disguise and martial arts and his drug use and correctly never wearing a deer stalker. The real triumph of the first film was the brilliant chemistry between Downey and Jude Law as Watson and the well-balanced examination of their amusing bromance. Thankfully the sequel doesn’t go down the Pirates of the Caribbean route by removing the fun in favour of a grim mood and unnecessary and unwanted character complexity but sticks to the winning formula.

Sherlock Holmes is hot on the trail of Professor Moriarty, a criminal genius with an intellect to equal the great detective, whom he suspects to be behind a series of seemingly unrelated happenings in Europe such as bombings blamed on anarchists. Meanwhile Holmes’ partner Dr John Watson is preparing for his nuptials, an event that could jeopardise the regularity of their friendship. The trail takes Holmes to Europe which is fast approaching a state of war as tensions escalate between France and Germany. Holmes and Watson, relieved of his honeymoon enlist the help of a gypsy woman (Noomi Rapace) to track Moriarty down.

It’s a solid story with enough twists and turns to keep things interesting but it doesn’t feel like as much of a mystery this time around. A Game of Shadows is more of a boy’s own adventure featuring some Bond-like globetrotting, exciting action and bromantic character comedy. After a slow and moderately shaky build-up the film finds its pace with a thrilling and hilarious set piece set aboard a train – something every adventure story should have and it never looks back rattling from one memorable moment to another. Ritchie’s distinct and vibrant visual style lends the period setting the same steampunk edge that gave the first film its strong character and makes for some dazzling sequences. One such strikingly graded sequence that sees the heroes fleeing from heavy artillery fire through a European forest stands out as the highlight of the picture and one of the best action scenes of the year.

As before it’s the central relationship between the eccentric hero and his straight-man sidekick that proves the most consistent delight. Law’s Watson is great as he makes his way through early scenes in a state of perpetual incredulity at Holmes’ lifestyle and disregard for his upcoming marriage. Watson’s reaction to Holmes is a mixture of disgust and admiration and his loyalty is stirring. Holmes meanwhile is as aloof and guarded as ever, his unpredictability and focus subtly masking what is clearly a powerful need for his friend. And yes things do get a bit homoerotic particularly in one scene in which a topless Holmes invites Watson to lie down with him (to avoid a hail of bullets) but this aspect of the comedy is not strong or frequent enough to spoil things. It’s a good balance.

The supporting cast are largely strong, particularly Jared Harris as Professor Moriarty, channelling his father vocally and giving just enough balance to lend the film’s other critical relationship much needed weight. In Moriarty Holmes has met his match and his complex and ambitious plot delivers urgency to the narrative. Scenes in which the two meet are loaded with significance and the sense of mutual respect is satisfyingly intact. Noomi Rapace’s character is the weak link as she looks uncomfortable with her first English speaking role. It doesn’t help that her character has little real depth but she does just enough with very little not to end up a complete washout. Rachel McAdams returns briefly and has even less and her involvement in the story winds up rather anticlimactic particularly given her significance in the first film. Better is Paul Anderson as Colonel Sebastian Moran, a character from the original fiction and makes for the most well-developed and interesting henchman I’ve seen in a film in a long time. Then there’s Stephen Fry as Holmes’ older brother Mycroft, doing sterling work with a role that turned out to be more important to the plot than I had expected. Though Fry doesn’t have the same chemistry with Downey as Law his own wit and presence are more than enough to justify his inclusion and one revealing scene of his will live long in the memory.

Some have criticised the Ritchie-directed franchise for valuing style over substance but I don’t see that. This sequel might not be tremendously deep but it is very rich not least because it draws on substantial and iconic source material. I’ve even heard the phrase ‘brainless’ aimed in the film’s direction which is truly puzzling given the nature of the script and the ideas it has fun with. Take the returning concept of Holmes mentally planning fist fights before they happen, an original, entertaining and clever idea if ever there was one and one that is kept fresh here by pitting Holmes against a villain that can do the same. The bottom line is that Sherlock Holmes – A Game of Shadows is a pacey and consistently entertaining romp with a very strong identity, confidently made that never strays beyond the purity of what makes good escapism and that’s getting harder and harder to find, particularly in sequels.

Verdict

Despite a running-time in excess of two hours this breezy, fun and consistent sequel rattles along at a brisk pace that never lets you get bored. Anchored by a great central chemistry and drawing upon a rich mythology of mystery fiction it’s a rock-solid sequel that might not be as rounded as its predecessor but is just as diverting.

And now, well over a year after my review of Mossflower, we wrap up the original Redwall trilogy and the last of the great books in the venerable series (unless one of the final handful of titles can pull something incredible out of the bag), 1989’s Mattimeo, a direct sequel to Redwall.

Some seasons after the defeat of Cluny the Scourge the inhabitants of Redwall Abbey are enjoying the peace that has reigned there while preparing for a summer feast. Among them is the son of Matthias the Warrior, Mattimeo, a bright young mouse whose hot-headedness and confrontational nature are a cause for concern for his parents. While the Abbeydwellers are enjoying their feast they are entertained by a group of travelling circus performers who are really slave drivers in disguise, led by the villainous Slagar the Cruel who masterminds the kidnapping of Mattimeo and a number of other youngsters. Matthias, Basil Stag Hare and Jess Squirrel set out to rescue their offspring. The peace at Redwall doesn’t last long in the aftermath either as raven General Ironbeak and his band of crows and magpies descend on the abbey in an attempt to claim the building for themselves.

Mattimeo might be one of the most eventful books in the series, packed with incident and adventure from the outset, and despite being one of the lengthiest entries in the Redwall canon flies along at a brisk pace that never leaves a dull chapter. The strength of the book lies both in its involving plot and the characters that enrich it. Much of the original Redwall cast return and are as strongly conceived and likeable as ever but it’s a triumvirate of new villains that make this book’s characters stand out. In truth it’s just two new villains since Slagar is in truth a returning character too. The fox, known as Chickenhound in Redwall survived his encounter with Asmodeus but not without horrible disfiguration and a burning vendetta against Redwall driven by mad notions of revenge against the creatures he inexplicably blames for his ordeal.

Slagar is not the unforgettable villain Cluny was but he is among the best in a proud tradition of series nasties nonetheless. He’s an altogether different proposition from Cluny, less reliant on brute force and strength in numbers with a greater focus on strategy, shady dealings and good old-fashioned deviousness than the rat general. His influence and impact on the whole feel of Mattimeo is hard to overstate, the lion’s share of the story happens because of him and he is a powerful presence in every scene he features in. Second is General Ironbeak, a cruel and overconfident raven who provides more than ample antagonism for the inhabitants of Redwall and comes closest of the many would-be conquerors of the abbey in the series to actually achieving that goal. Finally there is Malkariss, who balances this trio of evil as the most mysterious and frightening of the three, injecting the back end of the book with real menace and power. To say more about him would be to stray dangerously close to spoiler territory but he rounds off the strongest line-up of baddies the saga has produced.

So it’s handy that there’s a suitably superb set of heroes to oppose them. Matthias returns as a dependable and stalwart protagonist, carrying on from where his character arc left off at the end of the previous book and serving as a perfect heir for Martin the Warrior. The title character is an altogether more interesting proposition. Mattimeo is a flawed, even brattish boy whose pride at his position as the Abbey Warrior’s son lends his character the kind of fallibility that gives him the room to learn from his ordeals. It’s another pretty obvious arc but it’s satisfying. The friends who share his unenviable situation in the slave lines provide excellent support for his character, among them the returning Tim and Tess Churchmouse, both featuring far more prominently than before, and of course the no longer silent Sam Squirrel who probably could have been used a bit more. They’re a good bunch, easy to root for but their story allows a little tension between them. Mattimeo’s mother Cornflower has a bigger role this time round, serving as the chief protagonist in the Redwall-set storyline. Then there are some new protagonists such as Orlando the Axe, a mighty badger warrior hunting Slagar with the aim of liberating his own kidnapped daughter from the slavers, and Jabez Stump the hedgehog who has a similar predicament. Then there’s rhyming owl Harry the Muse, the fierce Stryke Redkite, hydrophobic otter Cheek and the return of the Guerrilla Union of Shrews in Mossflower, the list goes on.

The strength of the plot is in its simplicity. It is essentially a chase story accompanied by another siege story. The pursuit of Slagar has tension and urgency throughout and the frequent exciting happenings from adventures involving everything from cave-ins to earthquakes. The journey leads hero and villain alike to a southern region of the series’ map that wasn’t revisited until the disappointing Loamhedge and lends the story a curious sense of mystery in the context of the series. At Redwall the same old story of underdog defenders fending off burly encroachers is kept interesting and varied with moments of both peril and comedy and the climax of both stories offer hugely satisfying payoffs.

Mattimeo is undoubtedly among the highlights of a very lengthy series that confirms Jacques was at his best in the early days. Redwall, Mossflower and Martin the Warrior are probably all better but it’s a fine line and there’s no shame in coming forth behind those three. Naturally it’s a cracking novel in its own right and a book no fan of the author or the series should ignore.

Verdict

A rollicking and varied adventure yarn that does everything right, delivering exciting action, epic scope and memorable characters. A fine sequel to Redwall and a robustly brilliant escapist tale.

I’ve been suffering from a spot of review congestion brought about by having lots of different things to write reviews for and not enough time to write. All I can do is keep plodding on and bash them out one by one. Reviews for Mattimeo and those three animated films I bought on DVD are coming and yes, so is that all important verdict on Skyward Sword but for now we’ll have to make do with one of the best films of the year.

I was still recovering from food poisoning when I saw this film, once again with my good buddy Ryan, and my relatively delicate state had an unforeseen effect of heightening the immersion since 50/50 is a film about illness, specifically cancer. Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Adam, a twenty-seven-year-old neat-freak with everything to live for, he’s got a good job working at a radio station with one-track minded buddy Kyle (Seth Rogen), a steady girlfriend and his own cool little pad but after seeing a doctor about back pains learns he has a rare form of spinal cancer from which there is a 50/50 survival rate, and, as you can imagine, his life changes.

That phrase I used there ‘as you can imagine’ is critical. One of the most powerful effects this film achieves is that it makes you imagine what it would be like coping with cancer in a way you might not choose to normally. In my case I think this effect was probably increased by my own weakened condition. I’m not going to compare food poisoning to cancer but I suffered some very unpleasant long-term digestive health problems as a result of a previous bout of gastroenteritis (yeah, breaking out the medical terms now) that required specialist treatment and I survived a very serious, life-threatening illness when I was a kid so I understand what it’s like to be really unwell and the reality that 50/50 offers is so strong it’s scary. The film really focuses hard on Adam, there’s barely a scene he’s not in and we follow his journey through chemotherapy and how his relationships are affected in plenty of detail before building up to the inevitable make or break moment. It’s a beautifully measured film, perfectly balanced to portray an accurate and painfully believable depiction of a killer disease without getting too depressing.

Hollywood tends to use cancer as the perfect platform on which to build a good weepie but this is actually a comedy full of bawdy lines, awkward social interaction and amusing observations. Kyle’s reaction to his buddy’s illness is to try and make the most of it and get both of them laid while Adam’s overbearing mother (Anjelica Huston), already looking after her Alzheimer’s suffering husband begins mollycoddling her son even further. Then there’s Anna Kendrick’s therapist whose greenness at her job (Adam is only her third patient ever) makes for some amusingly awkward moments. It’s a funny film to be sure and Rogen gets most of the best lines but the comedy never once trivialises the seriousness of the disease or strays into inappropriateness. The middle part of the film contains plenty of scenes that give us a break from the bleakness of Adam’s situation and it’s a good thing too because as the ending approaches the film becomes almost unbearably emotional. I honestly can’t remember the last time I got this emotionally involved in a film and this is thanks largely to Joseph Gordon-Levitt whose immense likeability and wonderfully human performance make it effortless to get behind Adam, I found myself desperately hoping he doesn’t die.

There are a few faults, the biggest of which surrounds Bryce Dallas Howard’s character Rachael, Adam’s girlfriend who tries to do the right thing but blows it. Howard does about as good a job as you can reasonably expect playing a thankless role as a character who receives no sympathy from the script despite being in a horrible situation. True, what she does is far from heroic but considering how well-balanced the script is otherwise her character’s treatment feels rather unfair. Other than this there are a couple of moments that don’t feel natural, such as Adam’s mother’s initial reaction to the news of his cancer and the doctor who breaks the news to Adam doesn’t seem to give a toss. But these are all fairly minor quibbles in an otherwise overwhelmingly well-executed movie.

The supporting performances are all note-perfect, Anna Kendrick is sweet and very funny as Adam’s therapist Katherine, Anjelica Huston nails the concerned mother role but it’s Seth Rogen’s performance that is the most interesting, which brings me to how the script came to be written. Will Reiser was himself struck down by cancer in his twenties and Seth Rogen was his real-life best bud who stuck by him through it. The script is based on his experience and Rogen is effectively playing himself in the story which adds a huge amount of maturity to his performance. He’s still full of profanity and bawdiness but this time it’s accompanied by a sensitive humanity that is clearly described by what must have been a harrowing ordeal for him playing the role for real. One rather touching moment when Adam drops Kyle off drunk at his apartment and discovers something surprising illustrates how the character has been written to give the actor more to do than his usual spiel.

50/50 may not be the most outright hilarious film I’ve ever seen (and given the subject matter how could it?) but it is nonetheless the best comedy I’ve seen this year because it treats its theme with maturity and grace barring a couple of stumbles and I’ve long been of the opinion that poignancy is all the more powerful when delivered alongside lightness (Blackadder Goes Forth anyone?). Needless to say the film triumphs.

Verdict

A thoughtful, funny boy’s weepie that will really get you thinking about how you would react to the same situation and deliver a karate chop to your heartstrings. One of the best films of the year.

To cheer me up after my food poisoning I trundled along to the cinema with Ryan to watch some good-natured British animated fun from Aardman. Is there anyone who doesn’t love Aardman? With their trademarked brand of silly British humour and masterful way with plasticine stop motion the Bristol based studio’s films have proved perennially popular. But this latest effort, their second foray into the world of digital animation has had to do without the easy likeability of the hand-made medium. The earlier film, Flushed Away, struggled to find the kind of commercial and critical success enjoyed by Chicken Run and Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit although I rather liked it. Can some festive cheer light up this second attempt?

Arthur Christmas tries to address that age-old question that has baffled everyone from small children to NASA scientists forever. Just how does Santa deliver presents to millions of children round the world in one night on Christmas Eve? The intriguing theory the film suggests is that in this modern age is that he uses not a reindeer driven sleigh but a massive spaceship called the S-1 and an army of elves all organised from a Lapland-based mission control. The whole thing is treated like a military operation complete with hi-tech gadgets, contingency plans in the event of ‘wakers’ and a cloaking device for the S-1.

Even more interestingly the film offers the concept that Santas retire and bequeath their duties to their sons and as such Christmas is a family business. Malcolm (Jim Broadbent) is the current Santa, nearing retirement, his heroically efficient heir apparent Steve (Hugh Laurie) is the cool-headed general in charge of marshalling the missions, Mrs Santa (Imelda Staunton) looks after the home front whilst the geriatric Grandsanta (Bill Nighy), long since retired from his post remembers the good old days. And on the edge of everything is Malcolm’s younger son Arthur (James McAvoy) a gangly bad jumper-wearing fellow full of enthusiasm for festivity who works in the letter-answering department.

After what seems like another successful mission delivering presents the family are getting ready to enjoy Christmas themselves the same way everyone else does by eating turkey and playing board games when it is discovered that one little girl from Cornwall was missed. Malcolm and Steve are reluctant to go back, pointing out that the margin of error was considerably less than one per cent so Arthur, distraught that one child will think Santa doesn’t care about her, takes it upon himself to deliver the gift and sets out with Grandsanta and an elf with ninja-like wrapping skills in the old reindeer-powered sleigh to rescue the little lady’s Christmas.

What follows is essentially a road movie with an airborne twist as the characters blunder their way around the world trying and largely failing to navigate the way to the girl’s house before daylight and for the most part it’s an immensely likeable delight. The script doesn’t zing like Aardman’s best there are moments in the family dynamic that ring true. This family bickers and gets on each other’s nerves as much as most do at Christmas and the story raises some surprising questions about our expectations of each other and there are even a few bits that might prompt nippers to come up with some other tricky questions about Santa, not whether or not he exists (the film knows as we all do that of course he does) but how much he cares and it’s a puzzle that Arthur has to grapple with too.

It seems the studio hasn’t quite figured out how to get the best out of the digital medium because the colour in certain scenes does look a bit drab but this was always going to be about character and comedy over dazzle, not that the film is devoid of the latter as it presents plenty of frenetic sleigh-riding sequences to get the excitement going. But it’s the cast of funnies you’ll remember and they’re all spot on. Nighy’s Grandsanta is probably the highlight, a colourful, decrepit complainer not too old for a spot of mischief while Laurie’s exasperated Steve provides most of the dramatic tension. Many of the best gags go to the scene-stealing Bryony and her mad gift-wrapping skills. Some have commented that the title character is a little bland but I found Arthur one of the more interesting characters, a wide-eyed, cheery youth all innocence and flailing limbs with some tough truths to face nicely understated by McAvoy.

But it’s the laughs that are the most important here and the film scores decently with a few notable duds. Strangely there aren’t as many background gags as usual and although the animation lacks the creators’ literal thumbprints, the style we all know is plain to see in every scene. The story itself is satisfying without offering any revelations or surprises and zips along nicely with just a middle act slump to weigh it down. Overall Arthur Christmas is an immensely good-natured and charming film that it’s difficult not to like.

Verdict

Not Aardman’s best but the memorable characters and funny script has the power to make this an annual Christmas favourite.

It’s been quite some time since my last review but never fear there are plenty on the way and this one for that rarest of things, a U certificate film directed by Martin Scorsese would have been posted sooner had I not been struck down by a very nasty case of food poisoning the night after watching it. Last time I take a risk with a ham sandwich. Anyway I’m still plugging away with Skyward Sword and have nearly finished re-reading Mattimeo not to mention my first decent paycheque in a while has given me justification to buy a trio of animated films on DVD so you can expect reviews for Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, The Secret of Kells and Coraline in the not too distant future. For now it’s time to look at a family film that celebrates the magic of old cinema from a director best known for his hard-hitting gangster movies.

Martin Scorsese certainly grabbed people’s attention by going so clearly against type and making a film you can take the kids to see (rather like Robert Rodriguez did with SPY Kids) but I’m very glad he did because Hugo is rather delightful. Asa Butterfield plays the titular Hugo Cabret, the orphaned son of a clockmaker (Jude Law) brought by his reprobate uncle (Ray Winston) to work maintaining the clocks of a Parisian railway station. With his uncle long since disappeared Hugo lives in secrecy in hidden places behind the station’s many clocks, stealing food to survive, dodging an orphan-hunting station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen) and working hard to repair a broken automaton bequeathed to him by his father.

One thing Hugo is not is an adventure film, something that may come as a surprise to anyone who has seen the trailers. It’s more of a mystery film that focuses on Hugo’s attempts to find meaning in his life by mending the automaton to reveal its secrets. Sure there are adventurous moments, including a couple of comical chase sequences but this is much more about character and setting than excitement. And the setting is a memorable one presenting the period Parisian station as the kind of magically enticing semi-steampunk place that reminds you of the most enchanting kid’s stories you loved when you were little. There’s a sense of community about it that reminds me of Spielberg’s The Terminal, a film many like to mock but I rather enjoyed but the slightly sentimental presentation of a fairytale centre for transport works far better here. It’s best illustrated by the burgeoning friendship between two minor characters played by Richard Griffiths and Francis de la Tour that is inhibited by the latter’s overprotective dog.

The characters are uniformly memorable thanks in no small part to the top-notch cast, not least of which is Ben Kingsley’s cruel and enigmatic toy seller. His goddaughter Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz) takes pity on Hugo and defies the embittered old man to help him achieve his aims with the assistance of Christopher Lee’s sweet bookseller. Only Sacha Baron Cohen’s station inspector doesn’t quite hit the spot, looking exactly like Arthur Bostrom in Allo Allo and affecting an unrecognisable accent. Still his character hides more depth the child-catcher exterior suggests. The two child leads are both fabulous, effortlessly charming with every line they deliver, conveying character and emotion with real skill, the kind of young actors you wish they could have found for the Harry Potter films.

It’s by no means a perfect film, it takes a long time to really get anywhere with the plot as charming as the first hour is it never feels like it quite knows what it wants to be until it settles on a mystery about Georges Méliès, the real world director of, amongst many others, A Trip to the Moon, the film that features that famous image of a rocket hitting the man in the moon in the eye, credited as the first ever science-fiction film. This is where the film finds its emotional grounding as it remembers with unchecked fondness the magic of early cinema. Anyone that shares that sentiment will be enchanted but it’s possible that youngsters that might lack the knowledge to appreciate the direction the plot takes this way might be lost.

It’s this affection for the mechanics of classic cinema that justifies the presence of 3D which is probably the best I’ve seen in a live-action film (my buddy Ryan who watched the film with me didn’t agree on this point, indeed he didn’t rate the film much at all). The opening shot of the camera swooping down over Paris into the station between two platforms is the highpoint that the film never reaches again but the visual presentation fits with the effect well. It’s still not a patch in the 3D in Tangled.

I think this one might be divisive. I found it reverentially magical but Ryan didn’t/ It felt to me like a particularly Chistmassy film and I think it won’t have any trouble finding its audience but not everybody will be convinced by the slow pace and general lack of excitement. I can’t say I enjoyed it as much as Super 8 but still thought it was great even if I will probably forever associate it with horrendous food poisoning.

Verdict

It doesn’t necessarily do what you expect and there are faults to be sure but excellent characterisation and performances and a world full of intriguing mystery combine to give the reverential story the right amount of charm.